ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: The aim was to compare the 'reverse sandwich restoration' to resin composite restorations re- garding marginal adaptation, fracture resistance, favourable/unfavourable fractures in the management of external cervical resorption. METHODS: Forty-eight extracted maxillary central incisors were selected and endodontically treated. Cervical regions of the labial root surfaces received simulated resorptive defects and were restored as three randomly allocated groups: Reverse Sandwich Restoration (resin composite + resin-modified glass ionomer) (RSR); resin composite restoration (COMP), and no restoration (NR). Each group was further divided into two subgroups (n=8 each): Thermomechanical Aging (TA) (equivalent to one year) and No Aging (NA). Marginal adaptation was scored by scanning electron microscopy. Fracture resistance was tested using a universal testing machine. Favourable versus unfavourable fractures were classified based on fracture extent. RESULTS: TA decreased the marginal adaptation for both RSR and COMP. Mean fracture resistance per groups were: RSR-NA 1522.4+-94.9N, RSR-TA 939.6+-72.9N, COMP-NA 1197.6+-95.7N, COMP-TA 870.4+-86.3N, NR-NA 1057.1+-88.1N, and NR-TA 836.6+-81.9N, respectively. Fracture resistance was the highest for RSR- NA compared to all other groups (p<0.05). TA decreased the fracture resistance in all groups (p<0.05), there was no significant difference between RSR and COMP regarding fracture resistance and favourable/ unfavourable fractures (p>0.05). CONCLUSION: RSR provided comparable results to resin composite fillings to restore artificial cervical defects pertaining to marginal adaptation, fracture resistance, and favourable versus unfavourable fractures. RSR is preferable due to its inherent biocompatibility to the periodontium. (EEJ-2023-04-050).
Subject(s)
Composite Resins , Dental Restoration, Permanent , Dental Restoration, Permanent/methods , Composite Resins/therapeutic useABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To determine the effect of adhesive strategy (total etch or self-etch) of universal adhesives in non-carious cervical lesions. DATA SOURCE: A search was made in PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane, Web Of Science, Open Gray, Clinical Registries. DATA SELECTION: Randomized Controlled Clinical Trials, studies on non-carious cervical lesions restored using Universal Adhesives, and studies in which universal adhesives have been used in total etch and self -etch strategies were included in this systematic review. DATA EXTRACTION: A total of 17 articles were included in the systematic review and 13 in the meta-analysis. Meta-analysis was conducted to assess the clinical performance of NCCLs in terms of retention, marginal adaptation, marginal discoloration, secondary caries and post-operative sensitivity at 18, 24, 36 month follow-up using USPHS as well as FDI criteria, separately. DATA SYNTHESIS: Overall there was no significant difference between total etch and self etch adhesive strategies for any of the five outcome measures using either the FDI or the USPHS criteria. p > 0.05, 95% CI, I2 value of 0%. A strongly suspected publication bias in the retention domain was seen at 18 month follow up under FDI criteria. CONCLUSION: Most universal adhesives show acceptable clinical performance. There is no significant effect of the adhesive strategy of universal adhesives on their clinical performance according to the results of our meta-analysis.
